.............21st & 22nd CENTURY RIGHTS...……………………….
ALL THE RIGHTS YOU COULD HAVE BUT DONT
………………………………
…………………...see our rights campaign…...………………www.rightscouture.com

Thursday, January 17, 2013

The Right to Declare Rights... the U.S. 2nd Amendment

The world's constitutions are filled with writing errors.

So when the U.S. founders wrote the Bill of Rights 2nd Amendment,

stating both the Right to Security (which could also have been stated as the Right to Self-Defense) and the Right to Bear Arms in a single Amendment, they are not alone in having made the most common error of rights writing ----combining two or more rights in one Amendment. Another historical declaration of rights, France's Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen (1789) is also loaded with this same error.

A second error of the U.S. Bill of Rights 2nd Amendment is implying something is a natural born right when it is really a law. Arms are a tool, thus arms ownership is really a law not a right. No one is born with a right to tools like guns, knives, shovels, sticks, cars, or computers. Tools should be governed under laws, whether local, state, federal, or international.

We must not confuse rights with laws.

Rights we are born with; laws we construct.

Revising a right to become a law does not mean it takes away the ability to have or do something. It simply make it more malleable. Humans can make a law allowing or not allowing gun ownership, and with it, the rules of that ownership, such as "Every citizen in the United States may own a gun..."

But as a law, there is space for change of the rules, which a right does not have.

Additionally, constitutional rights are only painfully revised.
Many history books portray the painful process of writing rights, whether in 1789 or 1948, due to contention, disagreement, and lengthy meetings drawn out over weeks, months, or years. Founder and Bill of Rights writer James Madison was so busy fighting for the existence of the Bill of Rights that the very substance of what he wrote was barely revised. Five of 17 Amendments were removed and almost none of his writing was changed. Another element included in the 2nd Amendment, complicating it even more, the right of conscientious objectors was removed (the U.S. could have used that one during the Vietnam War).

No revisions? Almost all writers revise.

Poet Walt Whitman kept revising Leaves of Grass, from its first edition in 1855 to his death in 1892. I have revisited and revised this short blog post four or five times. I have even revised a blog post, on occasion, a year later,
after discovering some new information.

Rights are precious, once declared, so the writing of rights has to be pristine.No one wants their rights touched.
In fact, President Obama had to calm the public
when speaking about guns on Jan.15, 2013, stating that the gun issue
is not about taking away the 2nd Amendment.

"That is not the issue here," Obama clarified during a press conference.

Make no mistake: this blog post is not about whether humans should own guns or not, nor the violence that arms cause. These fall into another rights discussion, either the Right to Life, the Right to Body Care, or even the Right to Biodiversity. This post is about rightsmaking and writing and the result of sloppy or hastily declared rights.

54 comments:

Anonymous
said...

One should be very careful when making laws and rights because this is a statement that governs the enrire population.Laws should not be made hastily made or in favor of the individual that's imposing it, but to made to govern the nation on a whole positively. I strongly believe, its imperative for laws that are being enacted, to be clear and precise.

Because writing is the physical representation of our thoughts, we must be careful in our composition. In popular language is common to use phrases with different meanings, but when we create laws or rights it is necessary to be clear in order to not let place for misunderstanding.HA

Why do we have to bear arms? Are we rational people? These questions have big connotations. Yes, we are rational people, but not always, do not forget that in annoy moments we are irrationals. If we have arms in that exasperate moment it can be really dangerous for a person, a family, a community, or a country. I am agreeing that The Second Amendment has specific controls.JC

I disagree with this post. The founding fathers did not lack clarity in the Second Amendment because they wrote this for years to come. It was wrote they way it was so that it could be applied not only in their current time but in the future as well. The same with any other Amendment, they were made in a way that would apply for generations to come.-KDP

I disagree and agree at the same time. I disagree because I do feel that we should have rights to bear arms. We never know what can happen to the world, or what if someone breaks into our home armed? Having a weapon at that time will be very helpful for protection to ourselves and family members leaving with us. The reason I agree is because sometimes we do let emotions take over us and end up doing things like firing a gun at someone and killing them. I don’t think it was a lack of clarity because they mainly thought of protection to the people. (D.R.)

I believe at the time that the founding fathers created the Second Amendment it did mean to lack clarity. I doubt they were able to predict the future of arising crime and more powerful firearms. I do agree the Second Amendment should be revised. It is hard to say what to because we should have the right to protect ourselves. It is a hard subject being that being precise will make the opposite party not agree. As an anonymous post said in his comment "One should be careful when making laws and rights because this is a statement that governs the entire population" -KM

The Second Amendment can be used as a model to demonstrate how a comma and capitalization can change completely, and confuse the understanding of a reader. I strongly agree with a post from Anonymous when saying that “when we create laws or rights it is necessary to be clear in order to not let place for misunderstanding”. If now we are facing this dilemma future generations will continue to face it. Since the laws are written to be applied at the present moment it lets space for misunderstandings, if not written clearly.N.

I have to say that this blog has made me think, and I do agree with what is being said. Everyone should have the right to security since birth, but we do not all need guns or arms. This should have been just a law,this goes to show how important is the need to revise your work especially when it's a right you are writing. All the new amendments if any to the constitution and future laws should be revised more than once and by different people to make sure its clear for everyone. There are a lot of discussions and fights over things like this, even today, and I believe it is important for all of us to get together, and make a good positive change in this world.AJR.

The second Amendment has kept this country secure for more than two centuries, from foreign and internal enemies, USA is maybe the only country never have lived an overthrown government. Also no government have betrayed the people, the reason, we have weapons. The fathers did a great job

When the founding fathers wrote these important amendments they didn't account for what could of happened in the future. They didn't think that the people were going to find loop holes to these laws and abuse of them. I think That Obama, or any other present major law maker should propose to have these laws re-written just so there is never another misunderstanding or people finding loop holes to written laws to create more problems in society.

If reading a text message in these days are confusing because the proper punctuation is not placed correctly and we misunderstand what the other person is saying, how much delicate is to write a law if is not written properly. We have to be careful and start practicing everyday even in those everyday texts. EO

People make mistate in today's writing, just like they made mistake back in the past. i do agree with correcting your writing. Thats how I know there is no misunderstanding in the message I am expressing on paper. -JA

After reading the post, I agree and disagree all at the same time. Our founding fathers did what they had to at the time & did it well. However, I do agree with the fact that it is necessary for people to proof read what they write.

The right to bear arms is a right not a law. Its our right to protect ourselves against a corrupt government to insure no government, will impose its will on the citizens of this great country. My opinion is that it was not poorly written. The declaration of independence and the amendments were written at a time when America just won its freedom, meaning they were written with no intentions of being revised nor, should it be. “You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of Grass.” Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto WWII JAP

"Laws only declare rights; they do not deliver them. The oppressed must take hold of laws and transform them into effective mandates" - Martin Luther King Jr. A law can only declare a right, but can a right declare law? The Bill of Rights should be amended for the present time that we live in. It should also be revised and based on moral justices. We should have the right to make revisions.

It's definitely something I don't think Madison envisioned as he was writing out the document, if not he would have revised it, right? When it comes to rules or laws that apply to the general populous or a large amount of people there will always be some issues regarding the longevity of it's effectiveness, but Americans just have to be more aware of gun safety and proper usage.-GV

I had never considered that the Bill of Rights had been written poorly or that some of these "Rights" are in reality laws, but you're absolutely right! In addition, the Constitution can and should be revised to reflect new information and changing times.

Firearm supporters usually have a fondness for guns and ammunition. We live in a world where people no longer trust the police and authorities to protect them and most people would rather have the tools to protect themselves. The second amendment protects the right to bear arms. After 240 years of having this amendment in our Constitution, the government and some people like me wants to change it. We need to keep in mind that there is a difference between carrying a gun and having the right to defend your own life. -Ish

I feel as if every one has the right to bear arms but some people, especially those who aren't in their right mind to own guns. I strongly agree with self protection, but States need more background checks, etc. to know who are buying weapons, and for what reasons. -VC-

I believe the founding fathers didn't make a mistake writing the 2nd amendment because no one knew what was in store for the future. They wrote this amendment because of the time period they were in and only people were truly using it for protection. Sure we have killings such as the Virginia Tech shooting, Aurora shooting and most recently the Sandy Hook shooting. I'm sure if the founding fathers knew the type of guns that were to be made later and how people were to use them in the future it would maybe not be illegal to bear arms but maybe some restrictions would apply on who can consume firearms. Most importably though guns don't kill people ! PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE! J.J

It is said that "guns do not kill people"; people kill people. I agree with the Second Amendment because guns can be very useful, but people forget that guns are a responsibility and abuse of that power.NDC

I'm sure you wanted to write about the art of writing or the need to revise your work, but the fact of the matter is that the gun debate is on everyone's mind after the sand hook shooting. Therefore, I will attempt to focus on writing with full intention of failing at that. You said "No human exits the womb, as a newborn, with the inherent need to have a gun" I believe that right and need are wrongfully used here. The right to self defense should give you the means to self defense if not it is deemed useless. Therefore, you are born with a need to a gun, since we live in a world where fire arm technology has progressed dramatically in the last century. *Sunshine*

Rights and laws should be revised not only to make them clear but also because society changes over time and has different needs. When the Second Amendment was written, the right of security may have involved arms possession but these days they are more related to crimes and homicides. M.J.

I feel for our founding fathers. It is quite the daunting task, indeed, to have set the precedence in which a nation would be built. Verbiage is often overlooked, and the importance of the significance of one word over another can change the entire purpose of what was intended to be stated. We should all take better care with what we say/write.

This post is very accurate in its statements. It is true that children are not born with the inherent wish to bear arms as they come out of the womb. They have a right to security, but does security only come when armory is involved? I believe we have the right to bear arms as posted by the 2nd Amendment, but there should be strict regulations for the usage of these weapons, not just as having them for show in your house with easy access to anybody. - ADYS

Rights and laws should be revised not only to make them clear but also because society changes over time and has different needs. When the Second Amendment was written, the right of security may have involved arms possession but these days they are more related to crimes and homicides. M.J.

The right to bear arms is a very delicate and dangerous law. The more people carrying weapons can cause more inccidents such as shooting in public and hurting innocent people. The way the law was written it was correct, people are the one ones who look for a way to make the right to bear arms seem that it was not written with enough specifications. (D.R)

I think that when writing any important document one has to be clear and precise to avoid confusion or misunderstandings. The Second Amendment in my opinion is clear, is just a matter of how and who is interpreting it.

Rights and Laws very complicated subject. So much even the founding fathers had difficulties writing them. So today we think the 2nd amendment was written incorrectly. Maybe it was purposely written the way it is, and will always be, so that it could never be changed. Sdeya

"Poorly" is an understatement to describe the way many laws are created. Several times, or at least in the example of the Constitution, they manage to get passed without revisions. I agree with the Right to Declare Rights, but only if the rights declared are useful rights that will serve in the future as well. Things change with time, and so do people. Our founding fathers did not expect society to run the way it is running today. Furthermore, the problem is that some individuals take their "constitutional rights" too serious, and then abuse them. Take, for instance, freedom of speech found in the First Amendment. It is abused daily by others.

There is no doubt in my mind that we are born with the right to declare what we believe in. We should just be careful how we interpret these amendments and laws, which were intellectually written by our founding fathers.SAMROG

The Bill of Rights was written over two centuries ago. Our society has drastically changed, and what was perfectly clear for the 17th century is not so clear now. Therefore the importance of amendments, which will have to be proof read and revised by several people. The rights of future generations depend on the clarity of these amendments. AR

When it comes to law making it is crucial that they are written with specificity towards what said law is trying to control. It's important to do this because for the most part there will be loopholes and workarounds that people will try to exploit making the law useless. -ID

Honestly, I will have to agree with president Obama's direct opinion of the matter; The Bill of Rights is well-respected within the United States because it is a legit document, and so forth; But the gun problem has nothing to do with the 2nd amendment.The gun problem is due to us, the people and the way we, handle the right. Are we going to be educated on the issue, or are we going to choose to abuse the situation? It is ultimately in our own hands. -FP

All rights should be accompanied by a set of laws and regulations that help our governing bodies define the parameters for well-being. If we do this, clearly stating out rights is just the first step to create a clear and precise set of laws to keep everything under control.

I agree with KDP. The rights were written to appeal to the people then and in the future. And one day I spoke to someone making a statement about gun laws stating, "why do we have guns if we are civilized?". My response to that would be, we as the people of the United States have to protect ourselves from intruders and from Dictatorship. -AX

I agree that there are errors in the Second Amendment, such as the use of words which today have a different connotation. The fact that there are two rights in one is also obvious. However, revising any amendment seems like an impossible task, even if it is necessary. Therefore, a possible solution could be the writing of laws according to our present reality. ATM

Really, it's not so much that the Bill of Rights is not worded to be perfectly clear, it's more so the fact on how people choose to interpret it. This Amendment was made for protection, so in regards to using a gun to save one's own family that's fine, but using it to take the lives of others is not. It's all about how people choose to view it.- Dav. P

We should have the rights to properly declare a right, but i also cant believe the people that have gotten the chance to obtain weapons and commit mass murders all around in the past years. not just this country but others, we don't live in a safe world its disappointing and sickening. we should be careful with what rights are pass.

I personally believe that the second amendment was written correctly, considering the context and socio-political environment that influenced the author. One important aspect of the quest is: how to determine when a particular liberty requires limitations by the state. Changing the constitution is not going to correct poor moral behaviors; if the current education system has failed, it is not gun’s fault or second’s amendment’s fault. IDO

Times change, the idea to review the Bill of Rights is hard to accept, but if changes are for good I will welcome the idea, as long as no body removes my right to self-defense and the right to bear arms. Changes have been made since 1870 and they were prepared for the good of the country.RC

The second amendment was written awhile back, as humanity grows and transforms so should the laws that govern us. I’m not referring to removing the 2nd amendment this post isn’t towards that goal, revisions of our rights and modifications should be looked into to better serve our society.~GEA

Personally, I think the amendments where written in a different time and errors are okay even in the law, no one is perfect But, if the people are confused and have issues understanding the laws. Then, the amendment should be rewritten to allow it to be better understood and enforced. JDF

As generation go by are way of thinking evolves, are founding fathers applied their knowledge to best of their abilities to reach to an agreement. But as time progresses their will always be room for improvement.RV

Maybe this is a good point to discuss. Why to create laws with several outcomes, when we can be more specifics? Perhaps politicians do not want or not have time to review the second admendment , but lawyers can do it. The same happen with the nineteenth amendment, and thanks to the revision women can vote in elections.RCadmen112

Maybe this is a good point to discuss. Why to create laws with several outcomes, when we can be more specifics? Perhaps politicians do not want or not have time to review the second admendment , but lawyers can do it. The same happen with the nineteenth amendment, and thanks to the revision women can vote in elections.RC

One should be very careful when making laws and rights because this is a statement that governs the enrire population.Laws should not be made hastily made or in favor of the individual that's imposing it, but to made to govern the nation on a whole positively. I strongly believe, its imperative for laws that are being enacted, to be clear and precise.SN.

I believe the founding fathers wrote the 2nd Amendment as a way to balance the power between those who rule and the people. To some, this may not seem like a relevant point these days, however we have to be very careful with what rights we give up. Historically, once rights are taken away, they're not given back.

I believe every citzen has the right to own a gun for protection. But I agree that the government should do some more background checks. But even then guns can still be baught illegally, so protection of yourself and your family is vital. -AC

Total Pageviews

Archives

COPYRIGHT

No part of this site, or any of the content contained herein, may be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever without express permission of the copyright holder, the Lady Philosopher. Just email me for permission!And if any photos of unknown origin here are yours,email me so I can give you credit for your work!

All Photos belong to the original respected parties as credited.. Picture Window theme. Theme images by anzeletti. Powered by Blogger.